The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

Continued from page 2

Still, Diller said the Newsweek/Beast's losses are unacceptable, and he suggested a possible path to slashing them. "The [Newsweek] brand is good," he said. "So what is the problem? The problem is in manufacturing and producing a weekly newsmagazine, and that has to be solved."

"The transition to online from hard print will take place," he said. "I'm not saying it will happen totally."

While he stopped short of saying that Newsweek will shut down its print edition, it was clear Diller meant to at least float that possibility. Whatever the course of action, it will be decided upon by October, he said. "The plan is going to be different next year than it is this year," he said. 'I can't tell you in what ways, but it's going to be different."

Even before Diller's ominous comments, many at Newsweek/Beast were wondering whether Newsweek will survive in any form. While the magazine has an illustrious history and international recognition, the Daily Beast was Diller's idea.

Ironically, what made the merger a failure may be what makes unwinding it so easy. Insiders say the promise of a hyper-efficient newsroom that would put out both a daily website and a weekly magazine with a shared staff was never really realized. Instead, each publication had its own editorial team with minimal overlap. Maintaining both brands made it harder to sell integrated ad packages across both ad and print.

With Newsweek losing far more money, ad sales manpower has been concentrated there, leaving the Daily Beast neglected. The source with knowledge of the business says it is on track to bring in less than $7 million in revenues this year. If that happens, it will again lose around $10 million.